Zohrab Mnatsakanyan's Secret Visit to Moscow After Conversation with Lavrov: What’s Being Hid?

168 Hours reports: "It seems the location and time of the next meeting between Pashinyan and Aliyev is being clarified - Vienna, March 29. What issues will be discussed during this meeting and what the parties will be negotiating is not disclosed, however, it is evident that such a meeting is being prepared at least at the level of foreign ministers.

Recently, a telephone conversation took place between Mnatsakanyan and Lavrov, the content of which was not revealed.

It turns out, however, that besides the phone call, Mnatsakanyan also visited Moscow, information about which is being withheld from the public. According to credible sources of 168 Hours, Mnatsakanyan's visit happened between March 21-22.

To confirm this information, 168 Hours sent an inquiry to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Armenia asking for clarification regarding the purpose of Zohrab Mnatsakanyan's absence from the country during March 21-22. We requested clarification on whether he was on a trip or not, what meetings he held, and why no official information was disseminated about it. In response, the Ministry spokesperson Anna Naghdalyan wrote:

"In response to the inquiry, I note that Foreign Minister Zohrab Mnatsakanyan was in Yerevan on March 21 and was absent from Yerevan on March 22. In this sense, no statement has been issued as there was no necessity for public disclosure."

This response essentially confirms our information that Zohrab Mnatsakanyan was in Moscow on March 22. Incidentally, he was accompanied on the flight by a staff member of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs who traveled in business class with him. Thus, the minister had a one-day visit to Moscow, from which he returned on the night of March 22-23. It is assumed that a meeting took place between Lavrov and Mnatsakanyan on the eve of the Aliyev-Pashinyan meeting.

So, what does the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' statement mean when it says: "no statement has been issued regarding the minister's absence from the country, as there was no necessity for public disclosure"?

If the minister is on an official trip, he is traveling at the expense of the state budget, therefore taxpayers have the right to know where and for what purpose the minister has traveled. If he was not on a work trip and left the country on a workday, it means he should have taken a leave unpaid. It should be noted that the Ministry’s response is more than surprising, if not strange, since the minister's absence from the country without a directive from the Prime Minister for a trip is not a usual occurrence, given that there is no notification on the government's website regarding this. This response raises more new questions than it answers previous queries.

Did the minister leave the country in violation of the law, or did he indeed go on an official trip to Moscow to meet with his counterpart and prepare for the Pashinyan-Aliyev meeting? The most intriguing part of this story is what specific issues or questions were discussed in Moscow that necessitated secrecy.

Read the full article in today’s newspaper.